Engaging multisector stakeholders to identify priorities for global health innovation, change and research: an engagement methodology and application to prosthetics service delivery in Cambodia

References

• Silva AL. Innovation in development cooperation: emerging trajectories and implications for inclusive sustainable development in the 21st century. Innov Dev. 2021;11(1):151–171.
   Google Scholar
• Petkovic J, Riddle A, Akl EA, et al. Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation. Syst Rev. 2020;9(1):1–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman RE, Harrison JS, Zyglidopoulos S. Stakeholder Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Esmail L, Moore E, Rein A. Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice. J Comp Eff Res. 2015;4(2):133–145.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Husain MJ. Contribution of health to economic development: a survey and overview. Economics. 2010;4(1):14.
   Google Scholar
• Hanlin R, Andersen MH. Putting knowledge flows front and Centre in health systems strengthening. Innov Dev. 2019;9(2):169–186.
   Google Scholar
• Natera JM, Tomassini C, Vera-Cruz AO. Policy analysis and knowledge application for building a healthy health innovation system in developing countries. Innov Dev. 2019;9(2):159–168.
   Google Scholar
• NHS England. Assessing capacity. www.nhs.co.uk. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Anon. Cambridge Dictionary. www.dictionary.cambridge.org. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Banks LM, Kuper H, Polack S. Poverty and disability in low-And middleincome countries: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York (NY): United Nations; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Peters DH, Bhuiya A, Ghaffar A. Engaging stakeholders in implementation research: lessons from the future health systems research programme experience. Heal Res Policy Syst. 2017;15:4–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kok MO, Gyapong JO, Wolffers I, et al. Which health research gets used and why? An empirical analysis of 30 cases. Heal Res Policy Syst. 2016;14:36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borsci S, Uchegbu I, Buckle P, et al. Designing medical technology for resilience: integrating health economics and human factors approaches. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2018;15(1):15–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holcomb J, Ferguson GM, Sun J, et al. Stakeholder engagement in adoption, implementation, and sustainment of an Evidence-Based intervention to increase mammography adherence among Low-Income women. J Cancer Educ. 2022;37(5):1486–1495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon MP, Fatone S, Ramstrand N, et al. Prosthetics and orthotics international welcomes qualitative research submissions. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2019;43(4):366–368.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• INVOLVE. Briefing notes for researchers: involving the public in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Partnership UPISD. UK standards for public involvement. NIHR. 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Realpe A, Wallace LM. What is co-production. London: The Health Foundation; 2010:1–1.
   Google Scholar
• Foundation T point of care. Experience based design toolkit. www.pointofcarefoundation.org.uk/resource/experience-based-co-design-ebcd-toolkit. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Concannon TW, Fuster M, Saunders T, et al. A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(12):1692–1701.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrestha A, Tamrakar D, Shrestha B, et al. Stakeholder engagement in a hypertension and diabetes prevention research program: description and lessons learned. PLoS One. 2022;17(10):e0276478–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joyce A, Paquin RL. The triple layered business model canvas: a tool to design more sustainable business models. J Clean Prod. 2016;135:1474–1486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carayannis EG, Barth TD, Campbell DF. The Quintuple helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. J Innov Entrep. 2012;1(1):2.
   Google Scholar
• Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y, Bernarda G, et al. Value proposition design: how to create products and services customers want. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Lane J. Aligning policy and practice in science, technology and innovation to deliver the intended socio-economic results: the case of assistive technology. Int J Transitions Innov Syst. 2015;4(3/4):221–248.
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson A, Donovan-Hall M, Kheng S, et al. Technologies to enhance quality and access to prosthetics and orthotics: the importance of a multidisciplinary, user-centred approach. WHO Global Report on Assistive Technology (GReAT) consultation. Geneva, Switzerland; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. Los Angeles, USA: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• INVOLVE. Public involvement in research and research ethics committee review. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman RE. Stakeholder management: framework and philosophy. In Strategic management: a Stakeholder approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984. pp 52–82.
   Google Scholar
• Mtika W, Wilcox H, Feune De Colombi N. Stakeholder engagement for applying Research to Policy and Practice for Health (ARCH); 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson G, Scholes K, Whittington R. Stakeholder mapping: the power/interest matrix. In Exploring corporate strategy. 8th ed. Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited; 2008. P. 156.
   Google Scholar
• More E, Probert D, Phaal R. Improving long-term strategic planning: an analysis of STEEPLE factors identified in environmental scanning brainstorms In 2015 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET); 2015. pp. 381–394.
   Google Scholar
• Whittington R, Regnér P, Angwin D, et al. Macro-environment analysis. In Exploring strategy. 12th ed. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited; 2020. Pp. 34–58.
   Google Scholar
• Lewin K. Field theory of social science: selected theoretical papers. New York: Harper & Brothers; 1951.
   Google Scholar
• Porter M. How competitive forces shape strategy. Harv Bus Rev. 1979;57:137–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. World report in disability. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Sexton S. Rehabilitation of people with physical disabilities in developing countries. Denmark: Køge; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• CHAI/ATScale. Product narrative: prostheses. London, UK: CHAI/ATScale; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Rehabilitation in health systems: guide for action. Geneva: WHO; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Marino M, Pattni S, Greenberg M, et al. Access to prosthetic devices in developing countries: pathways and challenges. In: 2015 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC); 2015. pp. 45–51.
   Google Scholar
• Saeedi P, Petersohn I, Salpea P, et al. Global and regional diabetes prevalence estimates for 2019 and projections for 2030 and 2045: results from the international diabetes federation diabetes Atlas, 9(th) edition. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019;157:107843. November;157:
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailey S, Nguon SK. Situation analysis for disability-inclusive governance and community development in Cambodia; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• NIHR. Briefing notes for researchers: public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. INVOLVE [Internet]. 2012; [cited 2020 July 8]. Available from: https://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/9938_INVOLVE_Briefing_Notes_WEB.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Andrysek J, Berthaume M, Boone D, et al. Ethical considerations and approaches for conducting clinical research studies related to prosthetics, orthotics and wheelchair technology in the low- and middle-income countries. Brussels, Belgium: International Society of Prosthetics and Orthotics; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Cobley D. Disability and international development. London, UK: Routeledge; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Ramani SV. On consortium driven sanitation interventions to end open defecation: insights from an Indian village study. Innov Dev. 2020;10(2):245–261.
   Google Scholar
• Dalal AK. Disability–poverty nexus: psycho-social impediments to participatory development. Psychol Dev Soc J. 2010;22:409–437.
   Google Scholar
• Bitton A, Veillard JH, Basu L, et al. The 5S-5M-5C schematic: transforming primary care inputs to outcomes in low-income and Middle-income countries. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3(Suppl 3):e001020.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bailey S. Ensuring sustainability of physical rehabilitation services in cambodia: analysis of transition process; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. WHO Standards for Prosthetics and Orthotics. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Khan F, Amatya B, de Groote W, et al. Capacity-building in clinical skills of rehabilitation workforce in low- and Middle-income countries. J Rehabil Med. 2018;50(5):472–479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. Task shifting: rational redistribution of tasks among health workforce teams: global recommendations and guidelines. Geneva: WHO; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Lindley RI, Anderson CS, Billot L, et al. Family-led rehabilitation after stroke in India (ATTEND): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10094):588–599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou B, Zhang J, Zhao Y, et al. Caregiver-delivered stroke rehabilitation in Rural China. Stroke. 2019;50(7):1825–1830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matter R, Harniss M, Oderud T, et al. Assistive technology in resource-limited environments: a scoping review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;12(2):105–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas P. Poverty reduction and development in Cambodia: enabling disabled people to play a role; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Ellen ME, Shach R, Kok MC, et al. There is much to learn when you listen: exploring citizen engagement in high- and Low-Income countries. World Health Popul. 2017;17(3):31–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar